«

Young Man wrote:
>
> Screw Orcon, the thieving @#$##!. I left them and am now back with
> World-Net. I get MAXIMUM dl rates and EXCELLENT pings.
>
>
Hmmm...angry young man

"-=rjh=-" <> wrote in message
news:d2d04e$vhl$...
> Hmmm...angry young man
>
>

Indeed. Orcon ****ed me off good. Oh so good. But world-net has been
excellent. Quality of service is 100 fold better than Orcon.

On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 17:45:46 +1200, -=rjh=- wrote:

> I'd be interested to know how they do their traffic shaping - how do they
> determine what is non-TCP traffic? Is it just done by port numbers or some
> other way?

Ummm non-TCP traffic would be anything that isn't IP protocol number 6. ie
ICMP is protocol 1, and UDP is 17 etc.

Or did you mean non-standard TCP ports? In which case it sounds like
whatever they felt like.

My definition would be that anything mentioned in an RFC is a standard
port

--
Cheers
Anton

AD. wrote:
>>I'd be interested to know how they do their traffic shaping - how do they
>>determine what is non-TCP traffic? Is it just done by port numbers or some
>>other way?

> Ummm non-TCP traffic would be anything that isn't IP protocol number 6. ie
> ICMP is protocol 1, and UDP is 17 etc.
> Or did you mean non-standard TCP ports? In which case it sounds like
> whatever they felt like.
> My definition would be that anything mentioned in an RFC is a standard
> port

so... 1-~65000 then

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:57:57 +1200, "~misfit~"
<> wrote:

>-=rjh=- wrote:
>> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
>>> nova wrote:
>>>
>>>>> "As an indication, you would currently be in the top 10% of users
>>>>> if you were generating in excess of 20GB of traffic per month."
>>>
>>>
>>>> I am wondering if the top 10% will go to ihug and cause the same
>>>> problems there...
>>>
>>>
>>> thats probably the idea.
>>
>> They probably won't - there is a fair amount of inertia involved with
>> changing ISPs (even without the churn fee) and as I see it, because
>> Orcon's pricing is independent of who you use for phone calls - the
>> way it should be, IMHO - their pricing is as good as is currently
>> available.
>>
>> I think hardly anybody will change, as things will improve over time,
>> and most people will wait and see, provided they have a reasonable
>> service in the meantime.
>>
>> I'll bet the majority of people who were complaining in this ng about
>> Orcon, and saying they were leaving, are still with Orcon. Willing to
>> be proved wrong of course.
>
>As I said earlier in the thread, the latency improved somewhat and I
>procrastinated so am still with Orcon. The latency has got worse again just
>recently so I'm hoping this shaping-thing fixes it or I might have to
>actually do something instead of just whinge and moan. <g>.

Might have to end up buying your ports, you get a package deal,
normal web ports and a set of gaming ports and a phone and tv port..

I have had my connections going spack, but I don't think it's orcon as
I'm don't do 10G of trafic a months, I think it's the rural
connection, that when it rains it goes slower.